>> Announcer: Live from Las Vegas, it's theCUBE, covering AWS Reinvent 2017, presented by AWS, intel, and our ecosystem of partners. >> Welcome back everyone, live here in Las Vegas. We're at AWS Reinvent. Day one coverage of three days of theCUBE, I'm John Furrier, the host this week. >> We've got two sets, our fifth year covering Reinvent. It's been great to watch. Every year we try to get in the VC panels. We just had Jerry Chen on from Greylock. We've got two more awesome friends of theCUBE in the community here. We've got Sunil Dhaliwal who is the founder of Amplify Ventures and Nick Sturiale with Ignition Partners. Guys, great to see you. >> Great to see you, John. >> Good to see you, John. >> Boy what a lineup it's been over the past three years, four years with Amazon, just watching them tear. Now it's all steamed ahead. Microsoft is totally gearing up. You can see them playing, what they're doing, they're pedaling as fast as they can. Google Play and the (mumbles) we're gonna compete on TensorFlow and other, little goodness, a lot more to go. You got Alibaba Cloud. Intel behind us is making (mumbles) chips. Good market on paper. >> Yeah. >> But we're seeing startups kind of get bought, not for what they wanted. Didn't go public. Skyhigh from Greylock. You see Barracuda going private. A lot of money to be made. Maybe the investment thesis of 200 million dollar fundings, that's over, is it over? Get a little bit of cash and get the critical mass and... >> Well, here's a question. Do you invest in these companies thinking every one of them is going to go public? Or do you think that a good number of them are gonna get acquired? And I think the investors that have done this for a while, and Nick's done this for what, like 45 years? >> I started when I was two, so. >> I've done this like two years less than you have, so I don't pretend I'm dramatically younger. But the reality is, these companies get acquired. And pretending that you're gonna pile into a company late and expect every single thing to go public I think is kind of crazy. And the people that are getting caught in that trap, I think they're gonna be in for a rude awakening. But look, you've got a billion six outcome for Barracuda, right? >> John: That was pretty damn good. >> And you know Skyhigh number hasn't been printed, but it wasn't a small one. Like, those are good outcomes. Those are good venture returns, if you were smart about where you got in. >> So I have a slightly different perspective, which is the real issue is that so much money moved into the late stage, and these companies thought that growth would always be linear even asymptotic. And so what happens is that their growth rate slows down and the cost of growth goes up, and suddenly the company's not quite as hot as it was a year ago, and so now the options for what they do have shrunk dramatically, and so you get exits like you just mentioned. And so part of the problem is is that entrepreneurs and investors really have to have a sober view of what is a business model that's durable over time and which ones really are gonna start to leak in their later phases. >> Well it's kind of a planted question for you guys, because you're early stage in Amplify. I've been following you guys, do a great job. You guys do a range of early, end growth. >> Mostly early though. >> The days of just laying back and kicking your feet up and throwing cash at stuff is over. You actually gotta do the work. It sounds like old school VCs. Greg Sands and I talk about this all the time. You gotta go in and be venturing. You gotta actually make it work. >> And that sucks, I was just told I put my feet up, I put some money in and then I get a distribution check at the end of it. >> That's what everyone thinks you guys do. What do you guys do every day? Take us through your day. >> It looks a lot like that except... >> It's so easy to be a VC, all you do is okay, yes, no, okay that's good. >> We got a dartboard. >> All you gotta do is bet on the good ones. >> Yeah. >> That's so easy. >> So there are what, 14,000 startups in the bay area, how many of them are worthwhile you think? >> It's a lot of work. Well old school, let's go back to the old school tactics, because you're seeing a couple things going on. You guys essentially pointing it out, you gotta do the work and pick the winners. But now that the business models are changing, right? You're seeing Amazon just ignoring conventional wisdom, and they're winning. The game is changing a bit in the business model side. How are you guys looking at that as you make investments? So you got the classic venture, bet on a good team, do all that stuff. What do you guys look at now in the marketplace for fit, scale, longevity, durability? >> I mean the stuff we care about the most is are you going after a big problem? Because I think a lot of the stuff we see, even with your great teams and great technologies, but you step back and you actually think, you know, that isn't a company, that's a product, or that's not even a product, that's a feature. And I think that's the natural outgrowth of what happens when you got 14,000 startups in the bay area, is there aren't 14,000 products that are companies worth having. What you have is, probably 12,000 features, 1500 products, and then like 500 real companies. And that's probably the biggest filter that you gotta apply on the way in, and it's maybe the hardest one to solve for, which is, roll this out seven years, nine years, because that's really what you're talking about when you're talking about building a public durable company is, what does this market look like way down the road? And is that a thing that can stand alone? And that's really, I think, the difference between the companies and the investors that do really well and the ones that can kind of squeeze by, knocking out a couple interesting outcomes. >> My favorite thing is that when you say we just pick the winners, is that nobody knows who the winner is a priori. If you knew that, that market would be gone already. And most successful companies that you read about, and they talk about the (mumbles) investors that were in it early, that's all BS. It's a million good things happen along the way, serendipity, a ton of hard work on the management team and the employees. So this idea that things are preordained is just silly. And I would tell you that you look at most really successful companies today, their business model is completely different than the one that the venture person backed. >> I mean it's always the classic, because I remember when I first started an entrepreneur in the 90s, the question was what's your exit strategy? It was a legitimate question at that time, and it was kind of a peg mark, okay, when I build a growing company and have an exit. Now the exits are, as you mentioned, buyers. And that's not necessarily a bad thing. If Microsoft's in a race to fill in their white spaces, man, I would crop up and get the crops growing, right? So you can say, okay, Microsoft. So you guys gotta kind of do a little bit of homework there, do some relationship work, and you guys are close to Microsoft, so. >> Yes. >> I mean, is that kind of the new playbook? >> Yes. >> How should entrepreneurs posture to this? I mean obviously they're gonna try to build a durable venture, but they don't want to be zig-zagging too much or pivoting. >> No. >> I mean Nick made the point earlier, which I think is absolutely the one to focus on, which is when you raise a ton of capital your options start to shrink. The more money you raise at the higher and higher price, there's somebody you gotta serve who's thinking about the even bigger pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. And honestly, when we look at, I'll take one company in our portfolio for example, and I think the Splunk story is right up there with it, If you look at Datadog, Datadog's huge here at this show. There's purple shirts everywhere and a massive booth, and they've been here for five years running or four years running. That business has barely touched the last round of capital they raised, let alone the round of capital before that. The capital efficiency of that business, not only is it gonna make it a great outcome, but it's gonna give them tons of options of things that they can do. And, you know, they'll get to make every single decision they make, whether it's going to new product or whatever, position of strength. And not a lot of companies do that. >> So Splunk started in 2004. Guess how much total the company raised before it went public? >> How much? >> Forty million. Guess how much it spent up to the time it went public? >> John: How much? >> John: Twenty five. >> So it went public... >> So very capital efficient? >> John: Think about that. >> Yes, and it's worth 9 billion now. So you had several hundred millionaires created out of Splunk, and I would submit to you if Splunk was started today, the investor community would have killed it. >> John: Why? >> Because 18 Brinks trucks would have backed up and dumped a billion dollars on top of it, and buried it in too much money without allowing the company to get the time to become a fully viable system. >> Sunil: Yeah. >> So the too much cash can create toxicity for the startup? >> Money rarely makes the company. Money rarely makes the company. >> Lew Cirne was on earlier, founder of New Relic. Another capital efficient company. >> Great company. >> Went public all time high. Love that guy. He's such a strong, he wrote some code last week. He said, if you can help your partners be successful, in referring to Amazon. >> Man: Amazon. >> Then you can be a great ecosystem partner. So the question now is that's not a bad deal for a company to jump into the Cloud game and be a really good partner and build a kick-ass product. >> Yes. >> And look like a feature maybe on paper, and then sequence to an opportunity. Thoughts on that? It's certainly lucrative if you can get the flywheel going. Right? >> So you don't want to build a company whose basic thesis is helping Amazon or Azure or Google. That is a dead company. If, however, you pull revenue for one of those three in a way that's interesting to them, they will support you all day long. We have two companies in particular, Icertis and KenSci that are pulling a lot of revenue for Azure right now. And Microsoft gives them extraordinary support. >> That's the nuance right there. That's the nuance. Pulling revenue, value, creation. >> Yes. >> Well, they've created Amazon and Microsoft and Google, to a degree, as they get going. They've created a really interesting model, which is unlike your traditional ecosystem, hub-and-spoke model, where someone's gonna capture (mumbles) control of the sale, etc., etc. The smart thing that Amazon's done is they say, you use whatever you want, we're gonna bill you for the primitives until the cows come home, and as long as you're not standing in between Amazon and their primitives revenue, you're gonna do great. >> All right, final question for you guys. First of all, great conversation on the capital markets, certainly it's crazy. We always try to cover it, but here's a thought exercise. Last night we were at the analyst summit. We were talking to some analysts, and the question was, the airplane's going down, and you're in a board meeting, I gotta pick a parachute. There are only three parachutes, Amazon, Microsoft, and Google, which one do you grab? You got 10 seconds. >> To sell to or? >> No, just grab a parachute, and you hope that it opens and you live. Pick a parachute. >> Amazon, >> I'm going with Amazon. This one isn't hard. >> Microsoft and Google. The only person who's gonna grab the Microsoft parachute is the guy who's been with Microsoft for 30 years and knows they're not gonna let him down. If you're a forward-facing company you're going with Amazon, and if you're nuts, you're gonna grab Google right now. No offense to my friends at Google. >> So we're sitting here at Reinvent, so I feel like that's a trick question. (laughing) >> Well, that's good. If you're in the Microsoft ecosystem, they do take care of their own. >> They do. >> Their DNA is tuned to ISVs, they're very good at it. >> and that's their track record. Well, the one guys says, well it depends. By the time you argue with the parachute the planes (mumbles). But it does depend on your business. >> Sunil: Yes. >> Nick: Yes. >> But it is hard not to look at this show and say this is what electricity was in 1920. >> Final question, obviously Amazon is looking at all steam ahead, business models are changing, you're starting to see the top of the stack develop nicely, moving up the stacks seems to be the trend. You got this decentralized market up there. Bitcoin hit 10,000. A lot of smart alpha geeks, including some of the guys here at theCUBE team, is looking at ways to kind of leverage this decentralization trend in a way that's productive. Yet there's a lot of scams out there with these ICOs. Decentralization good or just another infrastructure dynamic? Thoughts on this whole decentralized token economics wave? Also the FCC has regulations now in it. Is it disrupting VC? Your thoughts, Nick. >> Do remember what H.L. Mencken said? "A fool and his money are soon parted." so I think anyone who sits there and says I understand completely what an ICO is and what I'm buying and doesn't view it as something that'll be a tax deduction for next year, I think is gonna be in for a bumpy ride. >> Get out your Gartner Hype Cycle. And if you don't know what it is, go look it up, and there's a spot right now of where we are in the hype cycle, and I think the movement my finger tells you where we are, but this is coming, but this comes afterwards. >> I heard this argument, the web is just for kids. No one will ever use the web. Browsers is a toy. >> A K memory is all you'll ever need. >> Yeah, but guess what, guess what, 2001 happened before we got to 2017, so let's never forget where we are at that kind of hype. >> ICOs are like subprime mortgages, and I speak Spanish and I can't even read the thing. That is what an ICO is. >> So certainly hyped up. Winter's coming, we'll see. All right, we got the VCs here, Nick and Sunil. We got Amplify and Ignition Partners here in theCUBE. More live coverage day one after this short break.